According to Fourth Quarter 2022 data obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD), the San Jacinto Watershed has fallen further behind other watersheds in flood-mitigation funding on a number of measures.
Since 2000, HCFCD has spent $3.437 billion. The San Jacinto Watershed is the county’s largest and had the deepest flooding during Harvey as measured by feet above flood stage.
Chart showing feet above flood stage of 33 gages of misc. bayous in Harris County during Harvey.
The Minnow’s Share of Funding
Yet it has received only $65.5 million in flood mitigation funding since 2000, ranking it 14th among the county’s 23 watersheds. The 215-square mile San Jacinto Watershed received only $1.5 million out of $54.6 million spent by HFCD in the fourth quarter. Meanwhile, all of the following watersheds are surging ahead in the funding sweepstakes:
Addicks Reservoir received $1.9 million
Brays Bayou – $3.6 million
Buffalo Bayou – $4 million
Cypress Creek – $6.3 million
Greens Bayou – $5.3 million
Halls Bayou – $6.3 million
Hunting Bayou – $2.3 million
Little Cypress Creek – $3 million
Luce Bayou – $2.5 million
Sims Bayou – $4.6 million
White Oak Bayou – $2.1 million.
Most of these watersheds have received extensive funding in the past. For instance, Brays Bayou has received more than half a billion dollars since 2000 and $175 million since Harvey.
Low-to-Moderate Income Watersheds Leave the Pack Behind
And since 2000, four low-to-moderate income (LMI) watersheds have received virtually half of all funding. Brays, Greens, White Oak and Sims received half of $2.4 billion – as much as all 19 other watersheds combined.
Brays, Greens White Oak and Sims have consumed half of all flood-mitigation funding since 2000.
If you compare ALL watersheds with a majority LMI population, 8 LMI watersheds received 60% compared to 40% for 15 others.
This next table shows watersheds ranked by LMI percentage and the amount spent on each. Halls is one fifth the size of the San Jacinto and has about half the population. But it has almost double the LMI population and received almost twice as much money.
Omits $1 Billion in countywide spending to compare watershedsbetter.
The Slippery Slope
The chart below shows the rank order of all watersheds based on total funding – both before and after Harvey.
Since Harvey, the San Jacinto has fallen below both the average and median spending per watershed.
An almost 90X disparity exists between the high and low since Harvey. The difference between Brays and San Jacinto is almost 5X.
Here’s the breakdown in a table format of who got how much.
Flood mitigation funding totals by watershed from 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2022.
Percent of Planned Spending
Another way to look at spending is by comparing the percentages of planned to actual for each watershed.
The San Jacinto has received approximately $30 million from the flood bond as of Flood Control’s last update. That’s out of $360 million on the project list – only one twelfth of the planned total for the San Jacinto.
Compare that with $185 million in flood-mitigation funding so far from the flood bond for Brays Bayou. That’s out of a planned total of $286 million. Brays has already received two thirds of its flood-bond total. That’s the power of equity.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/7/2023
1988 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/image-1.png?fit=936%2C614&ssl=1614936adminadmin2023-02-07 21:14:172023-02-13 08:33:33Flood-Mitigation Funding: San Jacinto Falls Further Behind
In the 1/31/2023 Harris County Commissioners Court Meeting, Commissioners voted to use another $64.8 million from the Harris County Flood Resilience Trust to keep 11 projects moving. All but one are in watersheds with a majority of low-to-moderate income (LMI) residents.
Projects Approved for Funding
Halls Bayou received:
$600,000 for construction of a stormwater detention basin
$1 million for channel conveyance improvements
$11.45 million for another channel conveyance improvement project.
Halls Bayou’s population is 72.5% LMI, the highest in the county.
Sims Bayou received:
$3 million for a stormwater detention basin and channel conveyance improvements
$4.4 million for another stormwater detention basin project.
Sims Bayou’s population is 60.8% LMI.
Greens Bayou received:
$2.3 million for mid-reach channel conveyance improvements
$4.5 million for the Smith Road channel diversion project
$1.8 for improvements to the Cutten Road Stormwater Detention Basin (Precinct 3)
$11.3 for the next phase of the Lauder Stormwater Detention Basin
Greens Bayou’s population is 59.8% LMI.
White Oak Bayou received:
$18 million for construction of the Inwood Forest Stormwater Detention Basin.
White Oak Bayou’s population is 51.9% LMI.
Armand Bayou received:
$6.5 million for convenance improvements along a tributary, Horsepen Bayou.
Armand Bayou’s population is 28.4% LMI.
All but one of the projects are in Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ Precinct 1 and Commissioner Adrian Garcia’s Precinct 2.
The lone project in Precinct 3 (Commissioner Tom Ramsey) will benefit Precincts 1 and 2 because Greens Bayou drains through those precincts.
About the Flood Resilience Trust
The Flood Resilience Trust uses Harris County Tollroad Authority money to backstop 2018 Flood Bond Projects that have come up short to date on Partnership Funding.
After these expenditures, $31.7 million will remain in the Flood Resilience Trust.
Of the $64.8 million approved for expenditure, $24.5 million will help make up for partnership funding shortages. The remainder will help make up for cost escalation.
For a full discussion of the expenditures and the Trust, see the table on the last page of this summary provided to Commissioners by the Flood Control District.
None of these Trust withdrawals benefit Spring Creek, Cypress Creek, San Jacinto, or Luce watersheds.
Harris County Watershed Map
$750 Million In HUD Funds Not Discussed
Commissioners did not discuss the status of the long-awaited Method of Distribution (MOD) for the $750 million grant allocated to Harris County by the the Texas General Land Office and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The MOD details the county’s plan to spend the money. Pre-approval is necessary to ensure the plan complies with HUD requirements. The County has known it would get the money for one year and nine months. H-GAC, which learned of a similar $488 million grant on the same day in 2021, got its MOD approved early last year.
Curiously, Harris County Community Services Department (CSD) learned it received conditional approval of a DRAFT MOD on January 25th, almost a full week before the January 31 Commissioner’s Court Meeting. Yet the approval was not on the agenda for discussion.
How Will Flood Bond Be Completed?
During the meeting, however, commissioners talked at length about a shortfall in partner funding and how to fill the gap.
Garcia fears there won’t be enough funding to do all the projects in the flood bond. But with the $750 million in HUD funds and money in the Flood Resilience Trust, the County could complete every project in the Flood Bond. That makes the County’s recommendation to shift money away from flood mitigation all the more puzzling. Flood Control would get only $325 million in CSD’s MOD. That wouldn’t even complete all the planned projects in the Halls Bayou Watershed.
Meanwhile, the San Jacinto had $223 million in planned flood bond projects. Of that amount, we have received only 13% so far while Brays Bayou has received 79% of its planned budget.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/6/2023 based on information provided by the Harris County Flood Control District
1987 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Garcia.jpg?fit=764%2C586&ssl=1586764adminadmin2023-02-06 16:24:292023-02-09 21:19:15Harris County Taps Flood Resilience Trust For Another $64.8 Million
After Hurricane Harvey, Harris County Engineering examined regulations throughout the region and recommended minimum drainage standards to reduce future flooding in the region’s cities and counties. Harris County even offered to pay the cost of inventorying existing standards and having an engineering firm draft recommended revisions. But almost 2000 days after Harvey, only half of the area’s cities and counties have taken action. Among those not acting: Montgomery and Liberty Counties. Here’s a breakdown of who has done what as of January 18, 2023, according to Harris County.
Already Upgraded
Twenty took Harris County up on its offer. They have already successfully updated their drainage regulations. They include:
Cities of
Baytown
Bellaire
Bunker Hill Village
Deer Park
El Lago
Friendswood
Galena Park
Hilshire Village
Houston
Humble
Jersey Village
Katy
La Porte
Pasadena
Piney Point Village
Seabrook
Southside Place
Taylor Lake Village
Tomball
Waller County
Considered Updates But Haven’t Acted
Twelve had requested and received an analysis, but had not yet implemented recommendations. They include:
Cities of:
Hedwig Village
Jacinto City
League City
Missouri City
Nassau Bay
Pearland
Shoreacres
South Houston
Spring Valley
Webster
West University
Fort Bend County
Not Acting
Eight have not updated ordinances and regulations. These include communities that did not respond to and those that refused Harris County’s offer. They include:
Cities:
Hunter’s Creek Village
Morgan’s Point
Stafford
Waller
Counties:
Brazoria
Galveston
Liberty
Montgomery
In fairness, Montgomery County did hire a firm in August 2022 to update/revise its drainage criteria manual and subdivision rules. The scope of work included examining some of the recommendations below made by Harris County. But work was expected to take at least a year.
Recommendations for Minimum Drainage Standards
The minimum drainage standards recommended by Harris County included:
Use Atlas 14 rainfall rates for sizing storm water conveyance and detention systems.
Require a minimum detention rate of 0.55 acre feet per acre for any new development on tracts one acre or larger. However, single-family residential structures and accessory buildings on existing lots would be exempt.
Prohibit the use of hydrographic timing as a substitute for detention on any project, unless it directly outfalls into Galveston Bay.
Require “no net fill” in the current mapped 500-year flood plain, except in areas identified as coastal zones only.
Require minimum Finished Floor Elevation (FFE) of new habitable structures be established at or waterproofed to the 500-year flood elevation as shown on the effective Flood Insurance Study.
I would add one more to the list:
No clearing or grading before environmental and drainage studies are completed, and during grading, measures are taken to protect neighbors from runoff.
This seems to be particularly troublesome issue for those surrounding new developments.
Self Interest
Harris County Engineering originally positioned adoption of the minimum drainage standards as a condition for receiving partnership money from the 2018 flood bond.
Clearly, not everyone sees that has a powerful incentive. Those outside Harris County likely see little benefit, especially since the Equity Prioritization Framework has delayed funding in those areas.
Perhaps Harris County should have emphasized how adoption of the minimum standards could help reduce flooding for ALL people in the region – including those within Montgomery and Liberty Counties.
During heavy rains in late January, I received dozens of reports of flooding in Montgomery and Liberty Counties. As growth in surrounding areas explodes, lax regulations are starting to inflict suffering on those area’s own citizens.
They should adopt higher standards for their own benefit, not just Harris County’s.
Photo taken January 30, 2023 along Harris/MoCo border near San Jacinto West Fork after 1.32 inches of rain.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/5/23
1986 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/20230130-DJI_0926.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2023-02-05 12:25:022023-02-05 12:32:31Montgomery, Liberty Counties Still Have Not Adopted Minimum Drainage Recommendations
Adventure awaits. After more than a year under construction, the controversial Laurel Springs RV Resort has finally opened between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks that parallel Loop 494 and Lakewood Cove.
Oh, and then there were the mysterious, unexplained black spots that kept showing up in the detention basin.
Grand Opening Theme: Adventure Awaits
With all that in mind, the Laurel Springs RV Resort came up with the perfect theme for its Grand Opening: “Adventure Awaits.”
In lieu of Grand Opening banners, marching bands, cookies and punch, the owner is offering 50% discounts through February 15th. The online booking form showed one flat rate – $69 per night – for all spots, sizes, and lengths of stay.
But the form was a bit confusing; it showed yucca trees and mountains in the background! Imagine the surprise when the snowbirds arrive!
Photos Taken During Grand Opening
Here’s what the resort looked like earlier this week.
Looking NNW from over Lakewood CoveLooking NNE from over power line corridorNorthern portion was not yet complete. Looking S. Ideal spot for railroad buffs.Water collecting below detention basin has not dried in months.
I counted ten RVs on the day I took these photos. But I never did see the yucca trees and mountains featured on their reservation page.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/4/2023
1985 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
It won’t be long now before we start seeing moving trucks at the Preserve at Woodridge. The new high-density, low-grass, pet-friendly, community of 131 free-standing rental homes has reached a milestone. The entire development is framed out. See the pictures below.
Photos Taken on January 29, 2023
Looking SE toward Kingwood Park High School from over St. Martha Catholic Church parking lot.Last homes under construction on the SW corner of the new subdivision.Looking toward the west from over the detention pond gives you a feeling for how close together these homes are.65% impervious cover according to the RG Miller plans.The pearlescent, allegedly “grass lined” stormwater detention basin seems to still leak silty stormwater into this tributary of Ben’s Branch.
Who is the Market For These Homes?
It will be interesting to see what types of tenants this subdivision attracts. The website shows a picture of young adults by a pool. These homes might represent a step up from apartments for some of them.
But none of the website’s pictures feature empty-nesters who might be looking to downsize. The long walks between cars and front doors could make it difficult to get all those groceries into the kitchen.
And the small amount of parking could deter families with more than one car.
Glad it’s not my money at risk. But maybe they’ve identified a new market niche.
The biggest complaints I hear are that these homes don’t fit the character of the surrounding community. People worry about negative impacts on their property values.
I have also heard firefighters express safety concerns about the proximity of the homes.
Regardless of how you feel, it’s too late to do anything about these now.
History of Project
To see the progression of this project, see the following posts:
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/20230129-DJI_0830.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2023-02-03 17:07:162023-02-03 17:14:01Preserve At Woodridge All Framed Out
Correction: Since publishing this, Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey contacted me to say that the discrepancy is not as bad as this article makes it look. He believes the percentages described below will be applied in a different order resulting in different outcomes. However, he could not provide final totals, saying that the SVI percentages were still being examined.Finally, he emphasized that the money Precinct 3 does get will be put to good use.He also emphasized the need to incorporate miles of roadway in each precinct into the allocation formula. Commissioner Garcia has not responded to my invitation to supply his point of view.
Original Article as First Published
To sell the controversial $1.1 Billion Road and Parks bond in 2022, Democrats on Harris County Commissioners Court passed a resolution promising voters that each precinct would get at least $220 million. The $220 million minimum was promoted to voters on the web, in the press, at community meetings, and in handouts and flyers county-wide for three months prior to the November election. For example…
Dems adopted an allocation plan that gives Republican-led Precinct 3 only $173 million – almost $50 million less than the promised $220 million.
Commissioner Adrian Garcia introduced his complicated allocation scheme in a five-part motion. He never did reveal the totals although he did admit that not every precinct received the minimum. Because he bases his scheme on the CDC’s social vulnerability index, not miles of roads that need to be maintained, Precinct 3 will get less money in total and less than one-fifth the dollars per “lane mile” compared to Garcia’s Precinct 2.
Who Gets How Much
Garcia never revealed totals for each precinct. To learn who gets how much, you have to calculate the totals yourself using a vague procedure Garcia verbally outlined during commissioners court on 1/31/23. It’s a confusing, multi-part formula that requires calculating percentages of percentages of percentages of figures found in different documents. Only after adding totals from three different subcategories does the ugly truth became apparent.
Harris County Engineering gets 10% or $110 million.
Each precinct then gets a flat baseline amount equal to 63.64% of the remainder.
Each precinct also gets an amount that varies based on the number of “socially vulnerable” residents from the remaining 26.36%.
SVI percentages vary widely. And they radically skew the final totals. Here’s how the math works out.
Precinct
Baseline Amt.
SVI %
Total Each Precinct
P1
$157,509,000
$117,446,067
$274,955,067
P2
$157,509,000
$147,186,806
$304,695,806
P3
$157,509,000
$15,645,510
$173,154,510
P4
$157,509,000
$79,690,617
$237,199,617
Calculations based on Garcia’s description of formula in meeting and the SVI numbers he supplied
The final totals could vary slightly if you applied the percentages in a different order. But any way you cut it, P3 still gets far less that the minimum guarantee and $50 – $100 million less than Democratic precincts..
This PDF explains what the 10% for Engineering covers and lists SVI populations in each precinct. SVI stands for the CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index. However, Garcia does not list a source or date for the SVI numbers, so we have to take his word for their accuracy.
Now, remember, this is primarily a road bond. So, let’s also look at how this allocation translates into dollars per lane mile.
Precinct
Lane Miles
Allocation
$/Mile
P1
2100
$274,955,067
$130,931
P2
2230
$304,695,806
$136,634
P3
6750
$173,154,510
$25,652
P4
3120
$237,199,617
$76,025
Lane miles supplied by Harris County Precinct 3 staff
Precinct 3 has 2-3X the lane miles compared to other precincts. Yet it gets the smallest allocation. Compared to Garcia’s Precinct 2…
Precinct 3 gets less than one-fifth the dollars per lane mile. This is no accident.
During the hotly contested redistricting process in 2021, Democrats gave Ramsey the lion’s share of unincorporated Harris County to maintain. Now, the final shoe drops. They denied him the ability to maintain those roads.
What Do YOU Call It?
Is this a political vendetta? Voter fraud? Financial fraud? Theft of services? A bald-faced lie? Business as usual in Harris County Commissioners Court? Or all of the above? You could build a case for “all of the above.” In my opinion:
If this were the prospectus for a new stock offering, the Securities and Exchange Commission would likely launch an investigation.
If it were an advertisement, the Federal Trade Commission could level hefty “bait-and-switch” fines.
If you told someone you were going to provide $50 million worth of services and then didn’t, but still took their money, the Texas Attorney General could build a felony case for theft of services.
Right now, the New York attorney general is suing a former U.S. President for making misleading financial statements.
No Transparency
Before the vote on the bond in November, Garcia could have offered up his allocation formula. But he didn’t do that.
And before the vote on the allocation formula Tuesday, Garcia could have easily said, “Here’s what each Precinct will get.” But he didn’t do that either. As with the Flood Bond and the Equity Prioritization Framework, this is another example of changing the deal after voters vote.
That’s why, in my opinion, this is deliberate concealment with intent to defraud taxpayers.
Garcia replied, “No.”Then, instead of explaining, he obfuscates. He quickly launches into a description of how the formula incorporates socially vulnerable populations. Garcia never does say what the totals are.
Ellis responds, “I’m fine with that.” And Hidalgo never circles back to ask what Garcia meant by “No.”
Despite Precinct 3 Commissioner Ramsey’s reservations and his plea for more time to study the impact of the proposal, the Dems approved Garcia’s allocation formula on the spot. This was carefully rehearsed.
Garcia also revealed other screening criteria for project consideration. Just in case you thought a project benefitting you might squeak through, the eligibility criteria involve factors such as:
Encouraged by a 4:1 majority on commissioners court, Democrats have become brazen. Tuesday’s revelation concerning the 2022 bond was one of many.
Commissioners still didn’t take any action on the $750 million in HUD funds that have been sitting on the table for a year and nine months.
That $750 million – with the flood resilience trust – could pay for every unfunded project in the 2018 flood bond. But instead of asking why Community Services has not prepared a detailed plan that HUD could approve, Commissioners allocated $64 million from local Toll Road funds to keep flood projects moving in Democratic precincts.
I suspect Dems want to cancel Flood-Bond projects in Precinct 3 and then blame the cancellations on a Republican-led GLO, which administers HUD funds in Texas.
That could push independents toward the blue column…at least those not paying close attention.
Lingering Concerns
The concerns outlined above are serious. But those aren’t the only concerns. Readers have written asking:
1) Will there be transparency for this bond like we had for the flood bond? Or will this turn into another give away to campaign donors?
2) How were the SVI numbers calculated? Are they available for review? How can we trust those numbers?
3) What other large public agency divides infrastructure money by SVI? Prove that it is a “best practice” and not a way to game the system to get more money in Precinct 2.
4) This is clearly political punishment for Precinct 3 that puts Republican lives at risk. Is this the example that Harris County “leadership” wants to set for future generations?
Garcia addressed none of those issues. Only one thing is clear. Last Tuesday was a tipping point in the history of Harris County.
If Commissioner Garcia wishes to write a rebuttal, I will post it.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/2/2023
1983 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Flier.jpg?fit=1511%2C544&ssl=15441511adminadmin2023-02-02 11:42:582024-09-18 07:15:14Dems Shortchange Precinct 3 by Almost $50 Million in 2022 Bond Allocation
As of January 30, 2023, Sprint Sand and Clay had excavated 80,360 Cubic Yards of dirt from a sixth Woodridge Village stormwater detention basin under an Excavation and Removal Contract with Harris County Flood Control District. Even though the new basin is not yet complete, it is already the second largest on the site.
Sprint’s $1,000 contract gives it the right to excavate up to 500,000 cubic yards and sell the dirt at market rates to make its money back. The purpose: to get a head start on construction of another basin that could eventually double Woodridge Village stormwater detention capacity so that it will exceed Atlas-14 requirements and create a safety margin to accommodate future development.
Reason for Project
Perry Homes sold the failed development to Harris County Flood Control District in 2021 after it contributed to the flooding of hundreds of homes in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest twice in 2019.
Excavation began in early 2022. By the end of that year, Sprint had removed 73,745 cubic yards of soil. January’s total means Sprint is about one-sixth of the way toward its goal.
The basin already holds a considerable amount of runoff as the pictures below show. The pictures were taken on 1/24/23 after a five-year rain (3.6 inches in two hours). That’s about half the volume that fell on May 7, 2019 when Woodridge Village first flooded Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest. But at that time, only the long narrow detention basin on the lower right had been completed.
Looking NE across the main part of Woodridge.Basin in foreground is the one under construction. Reverse angle, looking SWtoward Woodland Hills Drive and Kingwood Park High School.
New Excavation Already Second Largest on Site
80,360 cubic yards equals 49.8 acre feet. Woodridge Village’s five original basins had the following capacity:
N1 = 13.2 acre feet
N2 = 154.7 acre feet
N3 = 42 acre feet
S1 = 18.6 acre feet
S2 = 42.5 acre feet
That means the new basin already ranks as the second largest on the Woodridge Village site.
Only N2 has more capacity at the present.But eventually, the new basin could double its size.All basins will eventually converge into the basin in left foreground above. From there, water exits into Taylor Gully.Despite the 5-year rain that fell only hours before these photos, Taylor Gully never came close to overflowing on January 24th because of the controlled release rate.
More capacity will mean the site can safely handle much larger rainfalls.
Current detention pond capacity equals 271 acre feet. When complete, the new basin will add 309 acre feet, more than doubling the site’s stormwater detention capacity.
Next up: final design of the improvements before construction can begin.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/31/23
1981 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 1230 since TS Imelda
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/20230124-DJI_0770.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2023-01-31 12:48:072023-01-31 12:56:39New Woodridge Village Detention Basin Already 2nd Largest
Surprisingly heavy rains in the last week of January 2023 have led to floodwater rising on area streams. As of 1:38 PM on Monday 1/30/23, the National Weather Service predicted minor flooding throughout much of the northern part of the Houston region, including:
East Fork San Jacinto near New Caney affecting Montgomery, Liberty and Harris Counties.
Peach Creek at Splendora affecting Montgomery and Harris Counties.
West Fork San Jacinto near Humble affecting Montgomery and Harris Counties.
Cypress Creek at Katy-Hockley Road affecting Waller and Harris Counties.
Menard Creek near Rye affecting Hardin, Polk and Liberty Counties.
One on Top of Another
Jeff Lindner, Harris County Meteorologist, said, “While response on area watersheds in the northern portions of Harris County may seem significant for the amount of rain Sunday, when you combine rainfall from Tuesday and Sunday, totals of 8-11 inches are found over this area. The rainfall combined with saturated soils explain the significant rises on area streams.”
Here’s what all that rain looked like on the ground in the Humble/Kingwood Area last night and this morning.
Parked in wrong place. West Hamblen Road near West Fork.Townsen Landing development in Humble near Target in upper left.Saratoga Homes plans to build 357 singl- family homes here.Single- and multi-family residential, some of which will be dedicated to seniors on Townsen Blvd. West in Humble.US59 South at West Fork. Underpass closed due to high water.Looking N toward Lakeside Court and Treasure Lane between West Fork (left) and 59 (right). Confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork just west of US59. Note distinctly different color of water coming from the West Fork (right) where we have 20 square miles of sand mines between 59 and 45.Forest Cove Drive just north of West ForkLake Point Drive in North ShoreContractors are expanding the permanent detention basin at the new Kingwood Middle School.
It looks like we’re beginning to see the outlines of a football field and running track at KMS. That’s the one bright spot in all of these bleak shots. And to think, a few months ago, we were worried about drought.
“Plays Well With Others”
Remember that box on kindergarten report cards – “Plays Well with Others”? These last few photos dramatize the need for developers and their contractors to play by the rules. Most do. But some don’t. These last few shots show how to make a bad situation worse.
New Royal Pines development draining into storm sewer. Note water pouring over storm fence and directly into drain without filtration. A big no no. Violates stormwater regulations and could plug up storm sewers eventually.NW corner of Royal Pines floods neighbor in upper right.They installed silt fence last week. But unchecked runoff pushed it over the fence. See photo below.
Contractors sloped the land toward a neighbor’s property and have yet to build detention ponds. They have flooded the neighbor four times now in two months and have not done anything to correct the problem…at least nothing that has worked.
Same area but about several hours earlier. Weight of water pushed over silt fence.Eastern portion of Royal Pines doesn’t even have silt fence between it and White Oak Creek.Another part of Royal Pines eastern perimeter. More erosion heading toward White Oak Creek and the East Fork.Preserve at Woodridge Detention basin is supposed to be grass lined, but instead is pouring silt into a tributary of Bens Branch which HCFCD just cleaned out.
Ain’t Over Yet
January, February and March are normally our three driest months. But not this year. It looks like we will get 2-3X the normal monthly total.
National Weather Service Climate Data for Houston
Ten to 11 inches in 7 days qualifies as a five-year rainfall by Atlas-14 standards.
NOAA Precipitation frequency estimates
And more rain is on the way. NWS predicts heavy rain arriving from the north on Wednesday. They also warn of flash flooding.
If you have pictures of flooding that you would like to share, please use the Submissions Page of this website. Make sure to include the time, date, and location of the photo and how you would like the credit line to read.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/30/2023
1980 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/20230130-DJI_0930.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2023-01-30 18:25:362023-02-02 17:52:12Floodwater Rising and More Rain On the Way
Recent heavy rains and high-density upstream development on Ben’s Branch in Montgomery County have increasingly placed pressure on the aging Ben’s Branch Bridge over Tree Lane. The bridge is immediately adjacent to Bear Branch Elementary School in Kingwood and its 638 students.
5-Year Rain Leaves Bridge Worse Than Before Repairs
I took the photo below on 1/24/23 when Kingwood experienced a five year rain according to the gage at US59.
Photo taken on 1/24/2023 after 3.6 inches of rain in 2 hours.
I went back today to see what it looked like after the water went down.
After another 1.5 inch rain on 1/29/23.Note how the concrete fragment is pinching off street drainage for Bear Branch Village.
The issue, in my opinion, has to do with more and more water jetting through the narrow opening of the bridge. The turbulence has undermined concrete armoring on the banks that protects bridge supports. It has also carved out a huge area in the stream just south of the bridge.
Photo taken on Tuesday 1/24/23as jetting erodes area south of bridge.
The detention pond above on Ben’s Branch had its outlet wall blown out during Harvey 5.5 years ago and has not been fixed since.
An aging bridge. More water coming downstream. Insufficient mitigation. Eroding banks. 638 children. A perfect storm, so to speak. Let’s hope the City can expedite the repairs.
You encourage what you tolerate.
It’s time for people to speak up.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/29/23
1979 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/20230129-RJR_1136.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2023-01-29 19:48:162023-01-29 19:52:54Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch Damaged…Again
Harris County Community Services Department (CSD) has finally shared a high-level summary of how it would spend $750 million in Hurricane Harvey Flood Mitigation Funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The plan, called a Method of Delivery (MOD), was submitted to the Texas General Land Office (GLO) in December for preliminary approval, but returned to the county in January for tweaks to make it HUD-compliant.
CSD’s presentation is informational; the Department is not yet seeking approval from Commissioner’s Court. But this will be the public’s first peak at CSD’s direction.
While the presentation predictably emphasizes support for low-to-moderate income and socially vulnerable groups, it also contains some surprises. For instance, it mentions supporting activist groups, but fails to mention protecting bridges, hospitals and schools.
Damage to I-69 bridge disrupted areas to the north for 11 months after Harvey.Harvey flooded 6 of 9 buildings at Lone Star College/Kingwood. Repairs cost $60 million and disrupted classes for more than a year.
Long-Awaited
George P. Bush, former GLO Commissioner, requested a $750 million allocation for Harris County from HUD in May of 2021. HUD formally approved that amount in March of 2022. But Harris County Commissioner’s Court didn’t approve the grant agreement until August 31, 2022. And CSD didn’t submit its plan to the GLO for review until late December 2022.
The CSD plan reflects both HUD’s mission and the requirements spelled out in the State’s Action Plan. However, the GLO required CSD to make some tweaks to the initial plan to make it HUD compliant. During the tweaking process, Commissioners replaced CSD Director Dr. Adrienne Holloway with a new Interim Director, Thao Costis, the department’s SIXTH leader under County Judge Lina Hidalgo in four years. Costis previously led a non-profit group in Houston that provided services to homeless people.
“These funds intend to mitigate and build resiliency against flood risks in the region.”
Harris County Community Services Department
The Department claims it conducted ample data analysis and public input on the MOD. It says constituents lobbied for prioritizing “(1) low- and moderate-income population, (2) social vulnerability, (3) total population, and (4) National Flood Insurance Program repetitive loss properties.”
However, the presentation does not specify whether:
Repetitive losses will be weighed against previous mitigation investments. Will an area that once had high repetitive losses, but which already received hundreds of millions of mitigation dollars, still be prioritized over other areas that have received no flood-mitigation money?
Severity of flooding will be considered. Will one inch of flooding in a low-income home count for more than ten feet of flooding in a middle-income home?
Threats to infrastructure will be addressed. For instance, the loss of interstate highway bridges, hospitals and schools.
There’s no measure of “current risk,” nothing that addresses “threats to life,” and nothing that balances impacts to the community vs. impacts to individuals…at least in the summary that CSD is now sharing.
Plagued by “Vague”
CSD claims it prioritizes flood control and drainage improvements, natural or green infrastructure, water and sewer facilities, provision of generators, buyouts, and planning activities. I say “claims” because CSD did not provide a list of projects with the presentation. Nor did it provide a matrix for scoring projects.
The CSD presentation also referenced 2018-Flood-Bond Projects. But it’s not clear at this time if a potential project list goes beyond Hazard-Mitigation-Action-Plan Projects and Flood-Bond Projects … or even if there is a list. Nor does the presentation hint at which Haz Mit and Bond Projects would be included.
Finally, the summary makes no mention of any effort to ensure transparency and accountability. The public deserves to know where its money goes!
CSD says it would administer the $750 million grant and work with Harris County Flood Control District to “reduce flood risk and increase resiliency to future natural disasters for Harris County’s nearly 5 million residents.”
But we still don’t know who will get how much for what. Nor do we know what the expected benefits will be.
Partnerships
Though only Harris County and the Flood Control District are eligible to receive HUD’s $750 million, CSD states it will partner with other entities, including cities, within Harris County, that have “shovel-ready” flood mitigation projects. “Additionally, Harris County could sign [emphasis added] a Memorandum of Understanding with the Flood Control District to increase the amount of funding devoted to the 2018 Flood Control Bond,” says CSD. In other words, the County might send some of its share to HCFCD. But there’s no guarantee.
The CSD presentation shows that Harris County Flood Control will get only $326.25 million from the $750 million. The rest will go to Harris County. Out of the other $423.75 million, the county plans to spend $97.5 million on administration and planning. That would leave both Flood Control and Harris County with $326.25 million for actual mitigation work.
Word on the street in the engineering community is that the Harris County Engineer’s Office will handle the County’s portion of the money. Adrian Garcia appointees lead the Engineering Department and that would help Garcia influence where the money goes.
Inconsistencies, Typos Raise Questions
CSD’s presentation boils over with contradictions and typos that don’t speak well for “attention to detail” in a grant where $750 million is at stake. For instance, the plan says:
Projects will help the county’s entire population, but it prioritizes projects in low- and moderate-income, socially vulnerable areas.
CSD needs a 3-year extension … for shovel-ready projects.
The County will partner with other entities within Harris County, but cities and towns get $0.
I can’t wait to hear the explanations…especially how the money will help neighborhoods outside the Beltway given inside-the-Beltway priorities.
Nor can I wait to hear whether the cities in Harris County rebel against a plan that seemingly guarantees them nothing.
The presentation literally underscores CSD’s priorities:
“Once the MOD is approved by GLO, Harris County MOD entities reserve the right to partner with local governmental entities and special districts in the county to perform eligible projects, including but not limited to cities and Flood Control District. Harris County may also partner with local non-profit agency [sic] regarding public service activities that support mitigation and resiliency, particularly in areas were [sic] drainage or other mitigation activities are affecting low-to-moderate income households [sic] stability.”
Yikes! Three typos in one sentence!
Next Steps
This presentation only informs Commissioner’s Court and the Public about the grant’s status. CSD will not ask for approval of any projects on Tuesday. That will come later. The next steps include:
Public comments
Determining how to partner with other entities (Still, after almost 2 years)
Preparation of final MOD that incorporates public comments and responses
Approval of final MOD by County Commissioners (2/21/23)
GLO review and approval (March/April)
After GLO approval:
“Call for information of projects” (whatever that is)
Submit project packets to Commissioners Court
Submit project packets to GLO
Start projects (Fall 2023) six years after Hurricane Harvey!
Commissioner’s Court begins at 10AM on Tuesday. If you wish to make a public comment, here’s how to sign up to speak.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/28/2023
1978 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Flooded-Sign.jpg?fit=936%2C590&ssl=1590936adminadmin2023-01-28 20:07:262023-02-20 12:41:00County Outlines Plan for $750 Million in Flood-Mitigation Funds
